The new stuff - 11 guys?

Cervidal · Post by **Cervidal** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 8:53 am

I was away from the machine for awhile and I saw the huge thread on the rules updates. I can understand every change in the list and every clarifcation in the Q&A save one:

"Q :Do I have to field 11 players (or my entire team if I have less than 11 available)?

A: No. The only restriction is that 3 players must be placed on the line of Scrimmage. So you may set up 3-11 players at a kick-off. "

NO! This is outright idiocy. I don't care if there wasn't a rule that clearly stated the 11-player rule or not. Adding this to the game changes EVERYTHING against elves and MA9 teams.

If I have a dependable OTS, I'm going to win nearly every time under these rules. I NEVER have to play that player, except on offense when I want him to score. Even if the opposition beats the tar out of every other player on the pitch, I NEVER have to risk exposing my star player's neck, because there is almost no chance that he will ever be in a position to hit.

Someone is going to give me math on just how likely a OTS is to score each time. That math will not convince me after I have seen entire teams designed around the concept of the OTS, especially particularly nasty Skaven with tendencies to roll doubles. The only way to get rid of these players, for now, is to beat up the rest of the team and force the opposing coach to put his speedsters on the pitch. Now, I don't even have that option available.

Honestly, I think you guys did an overall great job with the clarifications. I've supported you before and I will again in the future. This, though.... yeesh!

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 2:23 pm

Putting only 3 players and a one turner on the pitch is silly imho. You will also need someone to pick the ball up and give it to the one turner.

I think it would make it easier to defend against him as you don't have to cover the rest of the pitch. If the one turner fails then your team won't be able to cope with the rest of the drive cause they are outnumbered in every position. I can't see this being a big deal and I for one would very rarely just set up the required 3 players.

dakkakhan · Post by **dakkakhan** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 2:53 pm

I believe he is saying he would only put his full team out there when he is getting the ball. Otherwise he puts 3 scrubs in there to get blasted, then his opponent will score, but who cares, all he needs is one turn to equalize or go ahead.

Forcing the Team with the OTS to put him on the pitch when they weren't getting the ball was your big chance at injuring him so he did not have a chance to impact the game.

This also further negatively affects the "bruiser team" chances for advancement as they seldom depend on just TD's for SPP's.

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 2:56 pm

What he's saying is that when he is short handed he doesn't have to put that OTS on the pitch and risk his neck just to fill The Sacred Number.

It's true. I agree that it's a stupid rule that seems to have been changed with little forethought.

A skaven team that builds up that OTS GR now ONLY has to field that GR when he plans on the OTS. That leaves little chance of the GR being taken out of the game(permently or temorarily)

Not to worry Cerv. Eventually the player will be forced to retire just like all good players in Blood Bowl. Never thought I'd see players dying of old age in my league.

Angus McKee · Post by **Angus McKee** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 5:32 pm

Pariah wrote:I agree that it's a stupid rule that seems to have been changed with little forethought.

It wasn't a change. It was a clarification. For good or ill, the rules do not state that you must field 11 players on the pitch if you have 11 or more available.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 6:07 pm

If a player wants to keep his players off the pitch and hand me an easy win see if care! If he wants to rely on some lamey one turner to win his matches, they will suffer a lot of losses. I will be more than happy ganging up on the 3 players he wants to field and let me pick and choose who to give my spp to. If they keep that up, they will lose players and not get any spp and their team will go to pot. Anyone would think you don't like winning.

Anyway like angus said its a clarification not a rule change.

Erineyes · Post by **Erineyes** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 9:17 pm

Hmm, watch me kick the crap out of the 3 guys on the field and then proceed to spend the entire half passing the ball, leaving him with only a single turn to score, he better get it right the first time then.

Kri · Post by **Kri** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 1:40 pm

Cervidal didn´t mean that he was going to field three players each defensive drive.
But if his team has gotten a couple of injuries and only have ten players available he isn´t forced to play with some of his key players. ( 1-rounders, great throwers...)
Instead he´ll field 9 players, do his best to stop but won´t risk losing his star.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 2:28 pm

That's fine ... as Pariah said the EXP system is coming and based on testing so far will probably be in place in October 2003.

If that's true then that OTS can literally retire of old age.

I really don't have a problem with the clarification. I ruled the same way as commish of the MBBL and MBBL2 on this one over a year ago.

Undead team was getting plastered and they wanted to protect their AG 4 Ghoul with only 11 guys left to set up and wanted to know if they could only field 10 ... I read the rules and interpreted them the same way as the BBRC ... the only requirement is 3 on the line if you have them.

Galak

dakkakhan · Post by **dakkakhan** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 3:37 pm

The three saps you put on the line of scrimmage ought to require a bonus after the game.

"sure, sure, I'll go out there and have my arse kicked so you primadonnas can stay safe here in the dug-out, no problem...but baby needs a new pair of booties so Show Me Da Money!"

Abandoning three scrubs to the brutality of the other team reeks of 40K desire to fire on your own troops, or into Close combat. No one wants to do it, because someday they will find themselves at the wrong end of that exchange.

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 10:44 pm

reeks of 40K desire to fire on your own troops, or into Close combat.

Your saying this is bad rite?

Knew i was doing something wrong in 40k, here i thot i was being chaotic

Warprat · Post by **Warprat** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 11:46 pm

Galak wrote:

I really don't have a problem with the clarification. I ruled the same way as commish of the MBBL and MBBL2 on this one over a year ago.

Undead team was getting plastered and they wanted to protect their AG 4 Ghoul with only 11 guys left to set up and wanted to know if they could only field 10 ... I read the rules and interpreted them the same way as the BBRC ... the only requirement is 3 on the line if you have them.

Your interpretation of the legal requirement of the rule was correct. But I think most Bloodbowl coaches would rather play it the other way. At least I would...

I don't know the details of the Undead game, of course, but it seems to me he was just getting what he deserved. Having to play that Special Player is exactly the kind of brutality Blood Bowl needs, IMO.

I'd much rather have my great players get injured, than have them fade away by ageing. Besides, the Ghoul can simply foul another player and get kicked out of the game if he really wants to woose out.

Warprat ;)